Yeah I think people are underselling if they just say it’s good. I just started it a week ago and I’ve been having this feeling like “how am I even playing this” I’m almost feeling guilty because it’s too good lmao. I went in with mild expectations but damn cyberpunk is scary good. Then I started the anime and it just built up the lore even more.
@@reality3304 right...I played about 5 hours yesterday and didn't even realize I wasn't fast traveling anymore,it's too much fun just dashing around,lol
I have been playing it for the last year and a half. It's been good since I started playing but 2.0 took the already good combat system to the next level. It's buttery smooth movement ripped right out of Mirrors Edge in some ways but with superior gun play and melee options is unlike any other story drivin open world action rpg. Add in vehicles and vehicle combat and now I'm riding around with a bat smashing the back windows of the expensive looking cars I drive by. The story and characters were already top notch but Phantom Liberty covers some of it's weaknessess and amplify's what it did right. The cinimatic presentation of converstions even in vanilla is best in the industry. Nothing comes close. You feel like V in these moments. Add to this the incredible endings, probably some of the best endings in any game like this really. Not everyone likes sad endings but for this setting they are done probably better then any other game I have ever played. Each one felt meaningful and not just choose good or bad like most rpgs. People still debate over which one is the best ending because people value different things and each ending represents a different set of these values.
@@reality3304universal experience I think. I downloaded it because I was bored of GTA 5 but I felt like I was in for a mediocre experience thanks to the reviews and everyone saying the game was bad. Now I'm literally addicted and it's my absolute favorite game of all time. Nothing compares to night city, the story, vibes and even driving around you can do in this game, the combat is so diverse and fun and now I even started using mods and it's even better than ever. Best game of all time, true to the CDPR legacy of amazing games.
I played it from the very launch, the potential was out of this world. The story was freaking awesome, even tho kinda disjointed. Now its freaking amazing, I can walk around the city for hours. Wait until you try it in VR, even without motion controls... it's the most immersive experience I've ever had. The cut scenes still allow you to look around in VR. So many unbelievable moments, shit I want to play it through again.
Cyberpunk is just superior in all facets. I just got bored really quickly in Starfield and didn’t play it as long as I had hoped I would. I’m sure I’ll go back to it someday but this is a no brainer comparison for me.
I started to play Starfield and immediatly have an urge to play Mass Effect: Andromeda, a game that i never really finished, but had in my library for ages now, while playing Starfield i was like... "you know, this stuff here, Andromeda did better...", i wish i had a vehicle like in Andromeda to traverse this places... At some point i gave up unistalled Starfield and installed back Andromeda and somehow it made me appreciate that game more than before. I do have Cyberpunk tough and i came back recently to see the update 2.0 + Phantom Liberty, and it was amazing!
"Can't give this category to Cyberpunk because I had to wait 3 years for the update." Well, I'm sure that people who search for reviews and want to buy a game don't care about state of the game 3 years ago. They are playing it now, so they wanna know what game is better NOW.
Cyberpunk now is one of the best games ever. Combat, graphics, characters, story, animations, city and details are top notch. There is no comparison. Only modders can make Starfield like around 8/10 max in the future. Nothing else, beacuse it has core problems. Cyberpunk was unpolished diamond and CDP fixed it themselves.
Starfield does a whole lot of stuff with a wide range of quality, mostly alright, some bad and some even good. Cyberpunk does a handful of stuff excellently. I’d rather take a handful of stuff that’s excellent than a whole lot of just alright content.
Cyberpunk has a better story, better visuals, better combat(by a mile), better characters, no loading screen, and better music. Super easy choice, Cyberpunk is one of the best games of the generation and all time. It’s the game most people dreamed it would be when the first trailer came out.
How Starfield is winner in world desing map category ??? They don even have map and that ai generated empty little box planets?? and 7 empty with zombilike npcs cities??win...Tehnical desing is winner too did you saw Hud in starfield is so badddd all over loadingscreens you really are Betsheda fan ... you stuck in 2000 in desing ...
Yeah but Cyberpunk is not much better. It looks pretty but that's all it has going for it. It's a shallow shell of a city with nothing ever going on. There isn't any interactible facets to the city. Eye candy and not much more.
@@Joseph-wh5ofwhat is this waffling 🤣 cyberpunk is brimming it radiates what I means to show a large polluted city of crime where corps rule everything with different gangs scattered across the map the badlands is meant to be a deserted plane but the city is overcrowded with people the metro is constantly moving there are tons of traffic and there is visible and hearable advertisement everywhere it’s perfect. Just tell me you’ve never played the game
The only way to make Starfield better than Cyberpunk is to just start over and rebuild it. There is NO competition. Only modders will fix all the issues with Starfield and CD fixed Cyberpunk on there own.
In videos like this there is always going to be an amount of subjectivity involved, that's understandable. Personally I think these two games shouldn't be put in the same sentence, but then again that's just me. But to sit here and say that Starfield, a game using a decade old engine, in which you can't enter a building without a loading screen, which character models and animations that make Skyrim's look good, with a mainly empty procedurally generated map is better in the technical and world building categories is simply wrong. Cyberpunk is the game Nvidia uses to pioneer industry leading real- time graphic technologies, Night City itself sets a standard not yet surpassed and is spite of all this performance in Cyberpunk is better. So Considering these facts, I don't know how you decided what you decided.
I love starfield got to keep it real no in game map and as much lore their supposed to be there is no data bank that you can refer to. No simple animations when you go to sleep it or eat food is retrospect
Starfield is a loading screen simulator, how the heck this thing can win Cyberpunk in the technical aspect? Their NPCs don't even react when you point a gun to them! Like... Is Bethesda paying this, dude?
Cyberpunk even at launch was so far ahead of what Starfield is it’s kinda nuts to think about. Bethesda just seems to be getting more and more bland and PG with their games.
Starfield even with mods will always be below Cyberpunk 2077. And in 5 years or 10, Starfield will remain Starfield, he will not arrive at Cyberpunk 2077. After a development of 5 to 6 years old, the game looks out; He has the same graphics as Fallout 4 or 76 and the combat mechanics are just as rigid. When the narration, we can say who to improve, always as much bored and no consequence
Cyberpunk is in the same category as GTA5 or RDR2 than Starfield (with the additional character customization). My question was why is Starfield being pitted against Cyberpunk? Starfield does not come close to Cyberpunk in my opinion (I had spent 400 hours on Starfield vs 50 and counting on Cyberpunk).
Cyberpunk isn't in the same category as either GTA5 or RDR2, this games are mostly sandbox, while Cyberpunk is more like a Action RPG, similar to Bethesda games, Bethesda does leans more on the RPG side than Cyberpunk, but not much, and the quality of the content is questionable at best while in Cyuberpunk the quality of the content is ALWAYS great. Even if Cyberpunk is quite similar structurally to GTA games, at the end of the day this games are different enough in many regards to be very distinct of each other. In other words CDPR formula is more similar to Bethesda formula than Rockstar formula.
I played hundreds of hours of Starfield. Dedicated much time to making vids on 'whats out there'. I took a break, visited Cyberpunk and i almost wept. Cyberpunk is lovingly crafted. I dont feel the love in Starfield. But thats so many patches past launch. Rough comparison to seek.
I agree but honestly I don't have the faith in Bethesda to do what CD did for their game. Sure, Fallout 76 isn't trash like it once was but nobody exclaims that Fallout 76 is amazing and a crazy comeback like what you hear about Cyberpunk. I get starfield and Fallout 76 are different games but they are both made by the same devs. I have seen Bethesda reach out to a lot of Starfield reviews on Steam saying "well that isn't what we want for Starfield" well guess what? Your community wants it LOL. The devs for cyberpunk listened but Bethesda isn't. I don't see Bethesda making Starfield anything better than mediocre at best.
I agree so much. Starfield feels like it was crafted by AI almost. There are only small portions of the game where the story is hand crafted and the areas unique. Cyberpunk feels like a labor of love down to the smallest graffiti in a back alley that some people may never see. Now they are updating it again to make the railway train work! They just keep adding features that being the city alive.
Played Cyberpunk since the start on PC... I had a few bugs in the beginning (as you have with nearly every game nowadays) but nothing was actually game breaking in 1.0. The game unfortunately underdelivered with what it promised and teased at and thus had overhyped expectations and was forced onto a last gen console it was never designed for. (PS4) But you could always feel that the content and world was crafted with care and love and there were so many details and little things since the beginning. It's even better now. But it was already good from launch for me. Plus CDPR listened to the fans and improved on the things it lacked. And personally I can't stand that washed out/pastel color look in Bethesda games.
@@fatallyfatcat5274 Andromeda is stil better game than Starfield, the combat is way better than Starfield, the guns and armors variaty is great, the story is better presented, theres better characters, and i don't even need to say that lore and world building despite been just an after thought in Andromeda is miles better and deep than Starfield simply because it is still Mass Effect.
@@fatallyfatcat5274 you know what? Actually the real problem of Andromeda is precisly that it is a Mass Effect game, if was a game of a different ip, it would be amazing, and fierce competition to Mass Effect itself... Is precisly the fact that Andromeda is a Mass Effect game, that make it less, it is basically just an spin off of Mass Effect franchise.
I think when comparing these two games, we should compare cyberpunk 2.0 vs starfield, because many viewers may be wondering which to buy. Cyberpunk at launch was a mess but it has been fixed and I dont think it's launch should hold it down. Yes it's a little unfair that starfield is still at launch and cyberpunk has had years to fix its game, but that is the reality of competition. Starfield wants $70. If you can get a better game for $30 on sale that already has DLC content and years of fixes, then people should go with the older game. The older game's launch quality has little impact on new players who are deciding between which to play.
Yes, both of these games are three years apart, but the difference is that Cdprojekt admitted the mistake and finally fixed the game and at this point it is one of the best games of recent years. And Betezda blames players for optimization or errors. That, for example, they have too weak a background to play Starfield. And everyone knows that Betezda won't fix Starfield even half as well as Cdprojekt Cyberpunk. Starfield fixes modders. And betazda will release the final edition with small bug fixes to make money. And CD Projekt not only repaired the game for free, added new content, but also created an add-on for free that surpasses the base game's plot.
@@PERUN_PL Even if Bethesda could fix many of the issues with Starfield, I see no reason why we should pay full price for a hypothetical game 3 years from now. If they manage to get seamless travel between planets, meaningful choices, optimize the game, and add a ton of content to make the AI generated spaces interesting and non repetitive, then I'll buy the game. I've got no ill will towards bethesda, I just want quality games, and starfield isn't currently as interesting as other cheaper games on the market today.
I think Cyberpunk, even closer to launch (after the first hot fix updates)- is a superior game to Starfield. However, to call it a superior RPG is just not true to me. Cyberpunk is an action game with RPG elements. And while Starfield is by no means a true RPG, it’s a whole lot closer to an ARPG than Cyberpunk is.
I think what most people, including myself, expected was an Elite: Dangerous level of space and exploration combined with the graphics and gameplay of Cyberpunk 2077, combined with the RPG and "world-building" elements as shown by their other titles.
I started to play Starfield and immediatly have an urge to play Mass Effect: Andromeda, a game that i never really finished, but had in my library for ages now, while playing Starfield i was like... "you know, this stuff here, Andromeda did better...", i wish i had a vehicle like in Andromeda to traverse this places... At some point i gave up unistalled Starfield and installed back Andromeda and somehow it made me appreciate that game more than before. I do have Cyberpunk tough and i came back recently to see the update 2.0 + Phantom Liberty, and it was amazing! In some ways Cyberpunk is a type of game that Bethesda should be doing this days, Cyberpunk has basically the same formula of Bethesda games, but it is just better, improved, enhanced... while Starfield is a Fallout 4 mod...
Starfields main story is serviceable, the ending is actually the most creative thing about it. Other than than it’s basically just a collectathon. Cyberpunk has amazing characters, amazing set pieces and thoughtful endings. I love Bethesda games both o don’t see how you could possibly give Starfield the edge in any category, let alone the story.
Nah man giving any category to starfield is just crazy. The only things starfield does better than cyberpunk are things cyberpunk doesnt even have. Like ship building. Cyberpunk has a much better map design and exploration
Cyberpunk doesn't have ship building, and shouldn't be fair to use this against it, but you could for instance compare the ship combat of Starfield with vehicle combat in Cyberpunk believe it or not but it is possible to make this comparisions. For example, aside from the customization, what else does Starfield space combat does better than the vehicle combat in C77? You have ship interiors in Starfield, in Cyberpunk, this doesn't exactly apply since cars are too small to have significant interiors. how the gunfight goes? In Starfield you shoot the ship main guns, and you basically can move through horizontally and vertically, while the vehicle combat of Cyberpunk you basically moves only horizontally, i find more compelling playing vehicle combat of Cyberpunk instead of the ship combat in Starfield, the ship combat is really very basic, a lot of others games do better than Stafield... let me give an exemple from another space game that i play... X4... one day i was piloting a corvet fighting an enemy destroyer, destroyers were massive compared with my small agile corvette, and then it happen, i got one shot by the destroyer... i didn't immediately died though, i was actually ejected from the ship, and very close of the destroyer... that would be my end if i didn't know what to do, so intead i just space walk until i reach the ship (you heard right i did and EVA), once there, i start to set up bombs in the vital systems of the enemy ship (you know? Things like shield generators, engines, turrets...), once i set them all up i press the button, but i didn't waste time watching the fire works, be close by to a destroyer blowing up only wearing a space suit is suicide, so i teleported to a nerby space station owned by me close by... i didn't saw the explosion, but when i went back there with another ship, that was there the scrap of the enemy ship, alongside the scrap of my own corvette... What i described to you, was a interaction i have in X4 (think about it as Kenshi, but in space with space ships), and yes i defeated a star destroyer with just bombs that i carry around... You can do this in Starfield, theres nothing similar to this sort of combat in Starfield, Strangely enough, you can do similar stunts with Cyberpunk, sure it isn't a space ship combat, but you can jump at any moment from your car and start to fight on foot against enemies, you can do that in Starfield aside from some very specific situation, and not seamlessly like in X4 or Cybepunk.
Andromeda is pretty good game overall. Gameplay is a lot of fun, and while story was a bit derivative, it had some great character moments and fun action scenes.
You’re incredibly biased I have to say starfield doesn’t win in a single category expect maybe just how big the map is but even then 99% of planets you can visit offer absolutely nothing 0 content 0 missions 0 loot nothing. Every location of Cyberpunk has gigs,side missions, ncpd calls cyberpsychos etc and the storyline? Don’t make me laugh😂 cyberpunks got 2 diverse immersive and entertaining storylines with tons of different endings whereas starfields storyline is the most boring missions until 12 hrs into gameplay by which players will have just done a bunch of side missions and have gotten bored of the game already
I have to say Cyberpunk 2077 is far more superior of a game than that overly hyped, failed to deliver garbage that is Starfield, I prefer fallout 4, oh wait hold up the graphics engine is the same lol 2-decade old graphics engine for a modern game hahaha who was the genius thought that be a great idea is an absolute moron. For the $170AUD asking price for premium edition and to bring out that garbage trash after what some 25years in the making is beyond a failure at this point. Heya Bethesda it's 2023 not 2003 stop making games with an outdated graphics engine and expect people to pay premium for unfinished garbage like Starfield, learn from Obsidian Entertainment and Larian Studios how to make a great game
Starfield - Just the idea that you have to have guns in a space-game feels sooo cheap, and loadscreens feels old and bad practice. Dialogs is just talking heads without souls.
Double barrelled shot guns 300 years in the future! The irony is that Cyberpunk 2077 is way more futuristic than Starfield in 2300. Starfield feels mostly the same as today, only with spaceships. Like nothing else would change in 300 years of humanity travelling the stars. Whatever Starfield is, it isn't a sci-fi game.
No 😂😂😂 Only blind Bethesda fanboys would think that. Cyberpunk 2077 is an astonishing gaming experience now. On every single measurable level it is superior. The writing is god tier and the voice acting feels like actual people talking. There are some fantastic quests all over the place in Cyberpunk, and almost the quests in Starfield is hella boring. The main story in Cyberpunk is moving and engaging, full of characters you remember, and endings that gut punch you. Starfields main story is an extended boring fetch quest full of bland characters you forget in 5 minutes. Combat is way more fun in Cyberpunk. Stealth too. You are delusional
I agree cyberpunk is a better overall game, but I like spaceships and there's nothing else other star citizen that I'd consider playing. I think the hype around starfield is a little too much. They literally just copy and pasted no mans sky and star citizen. Just wish star citizen would be finally finished.
That side mission comment is odd. Yes, you are dying. Of course there's an urgency. It's up to you to decide if that means you do side missions or not. That's why it is an RPG. WTH?! Also that exploration side content of Starfield sucks a lot. FFS Mass Effect 1 despite now over 14 years old was more interesting in that regard and it had the Mako! Srsly, why are you exploring on foot in Starfield? Even the astronauts who went to the moon had a rover -- in 1972! Besides the way you do your missions in Cyberpunk has actual reactions and consequences. I don't think your choices in Starfield matter at all, it just drags you through the content no matter what you character says or does. Stop simping for Bethesda.
Guy is honestly so biased and I can’t understand what he’s trying to say about the side mission point too 😂 it’s common knowledge that V only has weeks to live but the relic doesn’t make him weak in fact it does the opposite. Songbird literally gives us upgrades that are attached to the relic 😂 this UA-camr is god awfully biased
Cyberpunk 2077 2.0 with Phantom Liberty is one of the best games of all time, so sorry Todd, it’s not even close, and I liked Starfield even with all pf it’s bullshit
Cyberpunk on Xbox One is better than Starfield on Xbox Series X. Thats how shallow of a game bethesda made. The story is abysmal. The combat isnt as good as Fallout 4 let alone CBP. The graphics are shit on console. The skill tree is worse than Fallout 4 on every level. The characters all feel plastic at best. The exploration is non-existent. Playing roulette on which random planet you travel to is not exploration. Day one CBP had exploration in spades. You would just stumble into scenarios with better writing than most television. There is no metric where CBP isnt miles better.
I prefer Starfield cuz I love the atmosphere, ship customization/Combat. Just exploring an empty planet, or watching the stars and planets in the comfort of your own custom starship... There's nothing quite like it. It gives me cowboy bebop vibes. I'm not gonna defend the story/characters for being mediocre at best, especially when compared to the excellent character writing, story telling and world building of CP77. But the gameplay is just a matter of preference. And I just prefer Starfield in that regard personally.
the ship combat honestly is basic in starfield, in terms of intense ship combat, you have Elite Dangerous and star citizen any day. Being a long time player of Elite, things get pretty intense... also the ship systems and power distribution is taken from Elite Dangerous and they still didn't manage to get it right. The only plus point starfield gets is the part where you can make your own ship, whereas elite has a wide range of ship types with different weapon config, only weapons and systems can be customized, not the ship itself.
I like the combat system in NMS, when you start to take damage you ship components start to broken, maybe is the engine, maybe is the guns, maybe is just storage, until the point where your ship become a wreak incapable of flying and you need to fix it ASAP. More than once i start to get a beating on NMS and had to make the choice to land in the nearest planet to fix components of the ship. X4 also has a similar system, but you could fix your ship in several ways, dock on a repair station and pay for the service (or if you have a repair station it is for free), or if you have a carrier, dock on you carrier and fix the ship (for free) or then do an EVA and fix the ship yourself... L and XL ships also have repair drones, but sometimes they get destroyed in battle and you will need to buy more.
@@efxnews4776 i agree with your points, i played nms and x4 too, loved them, specially NMS.. the malfunctioning of ship parts, losing equipments while fighting etc makes things more intense. Since i've been a long time player of Elite Dangerous... i can say that while it does carry the same aspects, it cranks up a notch on that one... like losing your shield unit... enemies breaking the canopy glass and sucking the oxygen out.. and you having to bolt from the fight to the nearest station within 5 to 20 mins... of emergency oxygen. Enemies disabling your guns and engine.. you just sit there and take bullets.. or worst of all... getting hit by an EMP with total shut down... Games like these really gives you the challenge and puts you in a tactical spot of deciding how to put on a good fight.
Oh Boy I really wonder which game could possibly be better. Oblivion repackage loading screen simulator which has been written by a nazi who hates creativity, or one of THE most notible rpgs since New Vegas which only crime was to have a rough release*caugh* Like every single Bethesda game, only difference is that CD Project went back and fixed it instead of trying to Gaslight their Players into thinking that actually they like the bugs*caugh caugh* Post watching edit: holy s*it this whole video was just a bunch of staigth up lies, bad faith arguments, coping and making the exact same arguments they used to defend No Mans Skyrim to criticise Cyberpunk. A Gamejournalist could do a better job.
Wh... what... In actual youtuber, who said that you can enjoy multiple games like Starfield and cyberpunk, and Baldurs gate, this can be! There must only be one winner!
Starfield will be the same game in 3 years as it is now. Where as Cyberpunk will be even effin better in 3 years. Cyperpunk is more modder friendly than Snorefield. On launch I found CP2077(pc) a more exciting and enjoyable game than Sleepfield (pc) on launch, even with bugs.. Starfield looks dated, CP2077 looks cutting edge and its an older game eh?
I have to disagree with you on something. Cyberpunk main story is definitely better than Starfield. But Starfield side content is better than Cyberpunk. 1st off, Starfield's main story is a glorified fetch quest where the constellation group who are supposed to be out exploring the universe for decades have not explored a single planet. The entire question of the main quest is "are we alone in the universe" and "what is in the unknown". There seem pretty deep question in face value, but it's really not. These are question you ask a 5 year old to make them think you're smart. Then add to the fact that the answer of Starfield's main quest to these questions is... Yes and I don't know, respectively. Cyberpunk's main story on the other hand is simply about survival of one person. But throughout this journey of saving himself, he learned to save others and he learned his own worth. Basically a self discovery and character development that we as the player can learn from.
Frankly the problem of the story and side content in Starfield isn't that it has more, but the quality of the content, if you break down Starfield storytelling, it is basically power fantasy for kids, and the quality of this content is questionable at best. Here is the deal, in Starfield you can be a pirate, you can be a ranger, you can be the galaxy hero, this stories, (side content) are simply not believeble at all, like how you can be so much things all at once? And this was worst in previous Bethesda games with the main protagonist usually becoming the head of whatever group or organization the protagonist came across. While in Cyberpunk, V is ALWAYS a mercenary desperate to save his/her own skin, the: "you can be whatever you want" is basically limited by play style (builds) where you choose how you fight not exactly what you become, AND still you can have far more options than in Starfield, for example, you can skip the entire Aldecaldos questline if you just don't go meet with Panam (and see one of the most beautiful "backery" in the history of videogames up and close) thus cutting you out of an entire third act and ending What i mean by that is that is that not only the side content in Cyberpunk has obviously a lot more quality, it also plays a huge role on the options you would have if you don't seek out the side content... you can pretty much ended up with the third act having only the Arasaka as an option... if you rush your playthrough.
This is just, cyberpunk did enough and managed to redeem itself and starfield is better in most categories lol. I'm not blind lol there's no category were starfield is better, world design is an excellent exemple because to have a good world design you also need a good way of getting from point A to point B and that's definitely not going through 3 or 4 loading screens plus it's a empty universe full of empty meaningless boringa tasks lol, at least cyberpunk basic gigs are fun. I hope I don't need to talk about combat, story or progression. In regards to technical design, how are you going to review a games technical design but only look at it's problems and not what they did well too, starfield as, as many bugs as cyberpunk did at lunch plus basically every physics element wich belongs to the technical design is worse than cyberpunk, honestly you sound like you played cyberpunk at lunch a few hours and never got back in.
Starfield is the GOAT! It surpasses CP2077 in every way! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😜 jk Honestly though, the base building in Starfield is WAY BETTER than Cyberpunk 2077. Just saying.
Because we don’t live in the past cyberpunk on release had perfect world design, story, mechanics etc but bugs ruined it. And now look they’ve fixed the bugs which made it phenomenal and on top of that they added a secret agent expansion featuring another famous actor good new characters storyline mapping endings etc Bethesda are still running the same engine as they did for fallout 😂 they couldn’t make a good game if they took a century to develop and perfect it
@coconuttwee7288 Sure buddy, sure. You are the prime consumer for these corporations. Because you seem to be quite forgiving to a game that released in a broken, buggy, unpolished, unfinished, and in overpromised mess. I guess as long as it takes them 3 years to fix it. All is forgiven! At least Bethesda's launch for starfield was far smoother than cyberpunk. Bethesda did not receive a class action lawsuit and have their stocks plummeted by 70% after the release of their game. The same can't be said about cyberpunk.
@@Joseph-wh5of let’s not talk about the fact that cdpr got death threats to release the game and offered refunds when these very same people who threatened them didn’t like how unfinished it felt. Not to mention cyberpunk has been reborn Bethesda quite literally depend on modders to make their games look good their games are ran on the same century old engine that they refuse to upgrade and yet people like you are still bumming them for attention. Bethesda games are shit starfield is shit cyberpunk is not, end of story.
@coconuttwee7288 So you do endorse companies releasing unfinished products that they lie about? Good to know. Keep it up, little piggy, get your pre-order ready for Cyberpunk 2!
After 1.5 years only cyberpunk and after that 2.0 and dlc i went to starfield and have 55h in it after 9 days. For me starfield. It runns perfect on my series x. Cyberpunk is more like cyberbug on my series x. Almost every mission in 2.0 and dlc had 1-2 bugs.
How ? Betsheda dont fix games moders do that for them... so vanilia Strafield will be the same bore empty loading screen simulator as is now.Tod say that when ppl start asking to optimisation because of low fps that our PC are bad and we need upgrade.... well Starfield has bad fps on newest graphical cards... but they to bad for "modern Besheda game".
No amount of patches will remove all those loading screens. Cyberpunk never had alot of madatory loading screens. In fact I don't think outside of loading a save there are no mandatory loading screens. You will only see loading screens if you use the fast travel system. But most people don't use that system because driving around the world just feels good and the radio music slaps.
You pre-ordered the Starfield Collector's edition, didn't you? That sunk-cost is the only possible reason I can think for anyone saying anything positive about that absolute trash fire. Are you the AI that was writing all those review responses? You sound like it.
Nah honestly though how could he give anything to starfield especially world building😭 where almost every single planet from Bethesda is pointless and has 0 content whereas the entire cyberpunk map has tons of gigs side missions main quests spanning from different locations shops sights feel etc all better than starfield. Its like saying starfield has better map and world building than gta or rdr2
How can you even compare these two games? One of the is super old, boring with ugly everything and one of them is superior in every aspect of it... guess which :)
Who's your winner?
🔔 Social Media 🔔
► ►Twitter: twitter.com/NorZZaTV
► ►Instagram: instagram.com/NorZZaTV/
► ►Discord: discord.gg/S5ydpYm
Cyberpunk isn't just "good" now, it's freaking amazing! nothing even comes close to it!
Yeah I think people are underselling if they just say it’s good.
I just started it a week ago and I’ve been having this feeling like “how am I even playing this” I’m almost feeling guilty because it’s too good lmao. I went in with mild expectations but damn cyberpunk is scary good.
Then I started the anime and it just built up the lore even more.
@@reality3304 right...I played about 5 hours yesterday and didn't even realize I wasn't fast traveling anymore,it's too much fun just dashing around,lol
I have been playing it for the last year and a half. It's been good since I started playing but 2.0 took the already good combat system to the next level. It's buttery smooth movement ripped right out of Mirrors Edge in some ways but with superior gun play and melee options is unlike any other story drivin open world action rpg. Add in vehicles and vehicle combat and now I'm riding around with a bat smashing the back windows of the expensive looking cars I drive by.
The story and characters were already top notch but Phantom Liberty covers some of it's weaknessess and amplify's what it did right. The cinimatic presentation of converstions even in vanilla is best in the industry. Nothing comes close. You feel like V in these moments. Add to this the incredible endings, probably some of the best endings in any game like this really. Not everyone likes sad endings but for this setting they are done probably better then any other game I have ever played. Each one felt meaningful and not just choose good or bad like most rpgs. People still debate over which one is the best ending because people value different things and each ending represents a different set of these values.
@@reality3304universal experience I think. I downloaded it because I was bored of GTA 5 but I felt like I was in for a mediocre experience thanks to the reviews and everyone saying the game was bad. Now I'm literally addicted and it's my absolute favorite game of all time. Nothing compares to night city, the story, vibes and even driving around you can do in this game, the combat is so diverse and fun and now I even started using mods and it's even better than ever. Best game of all time, true to the CDPR legacy of amazing games.
I played it from the very launch, the potential was out of this world. The story was freaking awesome, even tho kinda disjointed.
Now its freaking amazing, I can walk around the city for hours.
Wait until you try it in VR, even without motion controls... it's the most immersive experience I've ever had.
The cut scenes still allow you to look around in VR. So many unbelievable moments, shit I want to play it through again.
Cyberpunk is just superior in all facets. I just got bored really quickly in Starfield and didn’t play it as long as I had hoped I would. I’m sure I’ll go back to it someday but this is a no brainer comparison for me.
I started to play Starfield and immediatly have an urge to play Mass Effect: Andromeda, a game that i never really finished, but had in my library for ages now, while playing Starfield i was like... "you know, this stuff here, Andromeda did better...", i wish i had a vehicle like in Andromeda to traverse this places...
At some point i gave up unistalled Starfield and installed back Andromeda and somehow it made me appreciate that game more than before.
I do have Cyberpunk tough and i came back recently to see the update 2.0 + Phantom Liberty, and it was amazing!
Yeah him saying starfield had a better main story than cyberpunk is extreme bias
"Can't give this category to Cyberpunk because I had to wait 3 years for the update." Well, I'm sure that people who search for reviews and want to buy a game don't care about state of the game 3 years ago. They are playing it now, so they wanna know what game is better NOW.
Cyberpunk now is one of the best games ever. Combat, graphics, characters, story, animations, city and details are top notch. There is no comparison. Only modders can make Starfield like around 8/10 max in the future. Nothing else, beacuse it has core problems. Cyberpunk was unpolished diamond and CDP fixed it themselves.
f*cking hell yeah! Tell it how it IS
Starfield does a whole lot of stuff with a wide range of quality, mostly alright, some bad and some even good. Cyberpunk does a handful of stuff excellently. I’d rather take a handful of stuff that’s excellent than a whole lot of just alright content.
I know a guy who said Pizza Hut has the best wings cause they're huge. Yeah, but how do they taste?
Cyberpunk 2077, there's no doubt about it.
Cyberpunk has a better story, better visuals, better combat(by a mile), better characters, no loading screen, and better music. Super easy choice, Cyberpunk is one of the best games of the generation and all time. It’s the game most people dreamed it would be when the first trailer came out.
How Starfield is winner in world desing map category ??? They don even have map and that ai generated empty little box planets?? and 7 empty with zombilike npcs cities??win...Tehnical desing is winner too did you saw Hud in starfield is so badddd all over loadingscreens you really are Betsheda fan ... you stuck in 2000 in desing ...
Yeah but Cyberpunk is not much better. It looks pretty but that's all it has going for it. It's a shallow shell of a city with nothing ever going on. There isn't any interactible facets to the city. Eye candy and not much more.
@@Joseph-wh5ofwhat is this waffling 🤣 cyberpunk is brimming it radiates what I means to show a large polluted city of crime where corps rule everything with different gangs scattered across the map the badlands is meant to be a deserted plane but the city is overcrowded with people the metro is constantly moving there are tons of traffic and there is visible and hearable advertisement everywhere it’s perfect. Just tell me you’ve never played the game
… Did you have a stroke mid comment?
The only way to make Starfield better than Cyberpunk is to just start over and rebuild it. There is NO competition. Only modders will fix all the issues with Starfield and CD fixed Cyberpunk on there own.
In videos like this there is always going to be an amount of subjectivity involved, that's understandable. Personally I think these two games shouldn't be put in the same sentence, but then again that's just me. But to sit here and say that Starfield, a game using a decade old engine, in which you can't enter a building without a loading screen, which character models and animations that make Skyrim's look good, with a mainly empty procedurally generated map is better in the technical and world building categories is simply wrong. Cyberpunk is the game Nvidia uses to pioneer industry leading real- time graphic technologies, Night City itself sets a standard not yet surpassed and is spite of all this performance in Cyberpunk is better. So Considering these facts, I don't know how you decided what you decided.
The fact that he referred to Starfield as an "RPG" was sus AF from the start.
I love starfield got to keep it real no in game map and as much lore their supposed to be there is no data bank that you can refer to. No simple animations when you go to sleep it or eat food is retrospect
Yeah that first "win" for Starfield on technical aspects and having so many systems had me like huh???
Starfield is a loading screen simulator, how the heck this thing can win Cyberpunk in the technical aspect? Their NPCs don't even react when you point a gun to them!
Like...
Is Bethesda paying this, dude?
Cyberpunk even at launch was so far ahead of what Starfield is it’s kinda nuts to think about. Bethesda just seems to be getting more and more bland and PG with their games.
I love Cyberpunk. I've got several hundred hours (including numerous restarts).
Starfield even with mods will always be below Cyberpunk 2077. And in 5 years or 10, Starfield will remain Starfield, he will not arrive at Cyberpunk 2077.
After a development of 5 to 6 years old, the game looks out; He has the same graphics as Fallout 4 or 76 and the combat mechanics are just as rigid. When the narration, we can say who to improve, always as much bored and no consequence
Cyberpunk is in the same category as GTA5 or RDR2 than Starfield (with the additional character customization). My question was why is Starfield being pitted against Cyberpunk? Starfield does not come close to Cyberpunk in my opinion (I had spent 400 hours on Starfield vs 50 and counting on Cyberpunk).
Cyberpunk isn't in the same category as either GTA5 or RDR2, this games are mostly sandbox, while Cyberpunk is more like a Action RPG, similar to Bethesda games, Bethesda does leans more on the RPG side than Cyberpunk, but not much, and the quality of the content is questionable at best while in Cyuberpunk the quality of the content is ALWAYS great.
Even if Cyberpunk is quite similar structurally to GTA games, at the end of the day this games are different enough in many regards to be very distinct of each other.
In other words CDPR formula is more similar to Bethesda formula than Rockstar formula.
Cyberpunk destroyed Starfield in everything. The only thing Starfield is better at is the ability to play in first and third person
Why is this even a question 😂😂😂😂.... Cyberpunk is 50000 lvls above the Starfield Trash Game 👌
Cyberpunk is my favorite game. It officially took final fantasy 7's place. The game has so much more to it, it isn't skin deep
I played hundreds of hours of Starfield. Dedicated much time to making vids on 'whats out there'. I took a break, visited Cyberpunk and i almost wept. Cyberpunk is lovingly crafted. I dont feel the love in Starfield. But thats so many patches past launch. Rough comparison to seek.
I agree but honestly I don't have the faith in Bethesda to do what CD did for their game. Sure, Fallout 76 isn't trash like it once was but nobody exclaims that Fallout 76 is amazing and a crazy comeback like what you hear about Cyberpunk. I get starfield and Fallout 76 are different games but they are both made by the same devs. I have seen Bethesda reach out to a lot of Starfield reviews on Steam saying "well that isn't what we want for Starfield" well guess what? Your community wants it LOL. The devs for cyberpunk listened but Bethesda isn't. I don't see Bethesda making Starfield anything better than mediocre at best.
I agree so much. Starfield feels like it was crafted by AI almost. There are only small portions of the game where the story is hand crafted and the areas unique. Cyberpunk feels like a labor of love down to the smallest graffiti in a back alley that some people may never see. Now they are updating it again to make the railway train work! They just keep adding features that being the city alive.
Played Cyberpunk since the start on PC... I had a few bugs in the beginning (as you have with nearly every game nowadays) but nothing was actually game breaking in 1.0. The game unfortunately underdelivered with what it promised and teased at and thus had overhyped expectations and was forced onto a last gen console it was never designed for. (PS4)
But you could always feel that the content and world was crafted with care and love and there were so many details and little things since the beginning. It's even better now. But it was already good from launch for me.
Plus CDPR listened to the fans and improved on the things it lacked.
And personally I can't stand that washed out/pastel color look in Bethesda games.
Cyberpunk and Starfield are 10 years apart
Strfield feels like it came out during Mass Effect 3 era.
@@fatallyfatcat5274 a cheap clone of ME3!
@@efxnews4776 So... Andromeda?
@@fatallyfatcat5274 Andromeda is stil better game than Starfield, the combat is way better than Starfield, the guns and armors variaty is great, the story is better presented, theres better characters, and i don't even need to say that lore and world building despite been just an after thought in Andromeda is miles better and deep than Starfield simply because it is still Mass Effect.
@@fatallyfatcat5274 you know what? Actually the real problem of Andromeda is precisly that it is a Mass Effect game, if was a game of a different ip, it would be amazing, and fierce competition to Mass Effect itself...
Is precisly the fact that Andromeda is a Mass Effect game, that make it less, it is basically just an spin off of Mass Effect franchise.
I think when comparing these two games, we should compare cyberpunk 2.0 vs starfield, because many viewers may be wondering which to buy. Cyberpunk at launch was a mess but it has been fixed and I dont think it's launch should hold it down. Yes it's a little unfair that starfield is still at launch and cyberpunk has had years to fix its game, but that is the reality of competition. Starfield wants $70. If you can get a better game for $30 on sale that already has DLC content and years of fixes, then people should go with the older game. The older game's launch quality has little impact on new players who are deciding between which to play.
This is an interesting take that actually is how people should be buying
Yes, both of these games are three years apart, but the difference is that Cdprojekt admitted the mistake and finally fixed the game and at this point it is one of the best games of recent years. And Betezda blames players for optimization or errors. That, for example, they have too weak a background to play Starfield. And everyone knows that Betezda won't fix Starfield even half as well as Cdprojekt Cyberpunk. Starfield fixes modders. And betazda will release the final edition with small bug fixes to make money. And CD Projekt not only repaired the game for free, added new content, but also created an add-on for free that surpasses the base game's plot.
@@PERUN_PL Even if Bethesda could fix many of the issues with Starfield, I see no reason why we should pay full price for a hypothetical game 3 years from now. If they manage to get seamless travel between planets, meaningful choices, optimize the game, and add a ton of content to make the AI generated spaces interesting and non repetitive, then I'll buy the game. I've got no ill will towards bethesda, I just want quality games, and starfield isn't currently as interesting as other cheaper games on the market today.
I think Cyberpunk, even closer to launch (after the first hot fix updates)- is a superior game to Starfield. However, to call it a superior RPG is just not true to me. Cyberpunk is an action game with RPG elements. And while Starfield is by no means a true RPG, it’s a whole lot closer to an ARPG than Cyberpunk is.
I think what most people, including myself, expected was an Elite: Dangerous level of space and exploration combined with the graphics and gameplay of Cyberpunk 2077, combined with the RPG and "world-building" elements as shown by their other titles.
"In Starfield, I think the story is really well written." dude is coping so hard.
I started to play Starfield and immediatly have an urge to play Mass Effect: Andromeda, a game that i never really finished, but had in my library for ages now, while playing Starfield i was like... "you know, this stuff here, Andromeda did better...", i wish i had a vehicle like in Andromeda to traverse this places...
At some point i gave up unistalled Starfield and installed back Andromeda and somehow it made me appreciate that game more than before.
I do have Cyberpunk tough and i came back recently to see the update 2.0 + Phantom Liberty, and it was amazing! In some ways Cyberpunk is a type of game that Bethesda should be doing this days, Cyberpunk has basically the same formula of Bethesda games, but it is just better, improved, enhanced... while Starfield is a Fallout 4 mod...
Starfields main story is serviceable, the ending is actually the most creative thing about it. Other than than it’s basically just a collectathon. Cyberpunk has amazing characters, amazing set pieces and thoughtful endings. I love Bethesda games both o don’t see how you could possibly give Starfield the edge in any category, let alone the story.
Cyberpunk gets my vote for most categories right now
Nah man giving any category to starfield is just crazy. The only things starfield does better than cyberpunk are things cyberpunk doesnt even have. Like ship building. Cyberpunk has a much better map design and exploration
Cyberpunk doesn't have ship building, and shouldn't be fair to use this against it, but you could for instance compare the ship combat of Starfield with vehicle combat in Cyberpunk believe it or not but it is possible to make this comparisions.
For example, aside from the customization, what else does Starfield space combat does better than the vehicle combat in C77?
You have ship interiors in Starfield, in Cyberpunk, this doesn't exactly apply since cars are too small to have significant interiors.
how the gunfight goes? In Starfield you shoot the ship main guns, and you basically can move through horizontally and vertically, while the vehicle combat of Cyberpunk you basically moves only horizontally, i find more compelling playing vehicle combat of Cyberpunk instead of the ship combat in Starfield, the ship combat is really very basic, a lot of others games do better than Stafield... let me give an exemple from another space game that i play...
X4... one day i was piloting a corvet fighting an enemy destroyer, destroyers were massive compared with my small agile corvette, and then it happen, i got one shot by the destroyer... i didn't immediately died though, i was actually ejected from the ship, and very close of the destroyer... that would be my end if i didn't know what to do, so intead i just space walk until i reach the ship (you heard right i did and EVA), once there, i start to set up bombs in the vital systems of the enemy ship (you know? Things like shield generators, engines, turrets...), once i set them all up i press the button, but i didn't waste time watching the fire works, be close by to a destroyer blowing up only wearing a space suit is suicide, so i teleported to a nerby space station owned by me close by... i didn't saw the explosion, but when i went back there with another ship, that was there the scrap of the enemy ship, alongside the scrap of my own corvette...
What i described to you, was a interaction i have in X4 (think about it as Kenshi, but in space with space ships), and yes i defeated a star destroyer with just bombs that i carry around...
You can do this in Starfield, theres nothing similar to this sort of combat in Starfield, Strangely enough, you can do similar stunts with Cyberpunk, sure it isn't a space ship combat, but you can jump at any moment from your car and start to fight on foot against enemies, you can do that in Starfield aside from some very specific situation, and not seamlessly like in X4 or Cybepunk.
Cyberpunk, hands down. It's not even close. Starfield, on the other hand, inspired me to reinstall ME Andromeda and The Outer Worlds, nuff' said.
Andromeda is pretty good game overall. Gameplay is a lot of fun, and while story was a bit derivative, it had some great character moments and fun action scenes.
@@cockyrustler Agreed; I actually feel it was quite unfairly bashed.
Yeah him giving map design to starfield is crazy bias
Andromeda is a good game, just not a good Mass Effect sequel...
World design goes to starfield ? Lmao yeah alright, shit video peace
Starfield is so frustrating because I know there’s a good game hidden in there. Maybe in two years it’ll improve like cyberpunk has.
You’re incredibly biased I have to say starfield doesn’t win in a single category expect maybe just how big the map is but even then 99% of planets you can visit offer absolutely nothing 0 content 0 missions 0 loot nothing. Every location of Cyberpunk has gigs,side missions, ncpd calls cyberpsychos etc and the storyline? Don’t make me laugh😂 cyberpunks got 2 diverse immersive and entertaining storylines with tons of different endings whereas starfields storyline is the most boring missions until 12 hrs into gameplay by which players will have just done a bunch of side missions and have gotten bored of the game already
I have to say Cyberpunk 2077 is far more superior of a game than that overly hyped, failed to deliver garbage that is Starfield, I prefer fallout 4, oh wait hold up the graphics engine is the same lol 2-decade old graphics engine for a modern game hahaha who was the genius thought that be a great idea is an absolute moron. For the $170AUD asking price for premium edition and to bring out that garbage trash after what some 25years in the making is beyond a failure at this point. Heya Bethesda it's 2023 not 2003 stop making games with an outdated graphics engine and expect people to pay premium for unfinished garbage like Starfield, learn from Obsidian Entertainment and Larian Studios how to make a great game
Starfield - Just the idea that you have to have guns in a space-game feels sooo cheap, and loadscreens feels old and bad practice. Dialogs is just talking heads without souls.
Double barrelled shot guns 300 years in the future! The irony is that Cyberpunk 2077 is way more futuristic than Starfield in 2300. Starfield feels mostly the same as today, only with spaceships. Like nothing else would change in 300 years of humanity travelling the stars. Whatever Starfield is, it isn't a sci-fi game.
No 😂😂😂 Only blind Bethesda fanboys would think that. Cyberpunk 2077 is an astonishing gaming experience now. On every single measurable level it is superior. The writing is god tier and the voice acting feels like actual people talking. There are some fantastic quests all over the place in Cyberpunk, and almost the quests in Starfield is hella boring. The main story in Cyberpunk is moving and engaging, full of characters you remember, and endings that gut punch you. Starfields main story is an extended boring fetch quest full of bland characters you forget in 5 minutes.
Combat is way more fun in Cyberpunk. Stealth too.
You are delusional
17:10 They added vehicle combat and car chases to the base game gigs with 2.1.
I agree cyberpunk is a better overall game, but I like spaceships and there's nothing else other star citizen that I'd consider playing. I think the hype around starfield is a little too much. They literally just copy and pasted no mans sky and star citizen. Just wish star citizen would be finally finished.
You should play Spacebourne 2, is an indie game, still in early access, but belive me when i said that it is better than Starfield.
That side mission comment is odd. Yes, you are dying. Of course there's an urgency. It's up to you to decide if that means you do side missions or not. That's why it is an RPG. WTH?! Also that exploration side content of Starfield sucks a lot.
FFS Mass Effect 1 despite now over 14 years old was more interesting in that regard and it had the Mako! Srsly, why are you exploring on foot in Starfield? Even the astronauts who went to the moon had a rover -- in 1972!
Besides the way you do your missions in Cyberpunk has actual reactions and consequences. I don't think your choices in Starfield matter at all, it just drags you through the content no matter what you character says or does.
Stop simping for Bethesda.
Guy is honestly so biased and I can’t understand what he’s trying to say about the side mission point too 😂 it’s common knowledge that V only has weeks to live but the relic doesn’t make him weak in fact it does the opposite. Songbird literally gives us upgrades that are attached to the relic 😂 this UA-camr is god awfully biased
Cyberpunk 2077 2.0 with Phantom Liberty is one of the best games of all time, so sorry Todd, it’s not even close, and I liked Starfield even with all pf it’s bullshit
Cyberpunk on Xbox One is better than Starfield on Xbox Series X. Thats how shallow of a game bethesda made. The story is abysmal. The combat isnt as good as Fallout 4 let alone CBP. The graphics are shit on console. The skill tree is worse than Fallout 4 on every level. The characters all feel plastic at best. The exploration is non-existent. Playing roulette on which random planet you travel to is not exploration. Day one CBP had exploration in spades. You would just stumble into scenarios with better writing than most television. There is no metric where CBP isnt miles better.
I prefer Starfield cuz I love the atmosphere, ship customization/Combat. Just exploring an empty planet, or watching the stars and planets in the comfort of your own custom starship... There's nothing quite like it. It gives me cowboy bebop vibes. I'm not gonna defend the story/characters for being mediocre at best, especially when compared to the excellent character writing, story telling and world building of CP77. But the gameplay is just a matter of preference. And I just prefer Starfield in that regard personally.
the ship combat honestly is basic in starfield, in terms of intense ship combat, you have Elite Dangerous and star citizen any day. Being a long time player of Elite, things get pretty intense... also the ship systems and power distribution is taken from Elite Dangerous and they still didn't manage to get it right. The only plus point starfield gets is the part where you can make your own ship, whereas elite has a wide range of ship types with different weapon config, only weapons and systems can be customized, not the ship itself.
I like the combat system in NMS, when you start to take damage you ship components start to broken, maybe is the engine, maybe is the guns, maybe is just storage, until the point where your ship become a wreak incapable of flying and you need to fix it ASAP.
More than once i start to get a beating on NMS and had to make the choice to land in the nearest planet to fix components of the ship.
X4 also has a similar system, but you could fix your ship in several ways, dock on a repair station and pay for the service (or if you have a repair station it is for free), or if you have a carrier, dock on you carrier and fix the ship (for free) or then do an EVA and fix the ship yourself... L and XL ships also have repair drones, but sometimes they get destroyed in battle and you will need to buy more.
@@efxnews4776 i agree with your points, i played nms and x4 too, loved them, specially NMS.. the malfunctioning of ship parts, losing equipments while fighting etc makes things more intense. Since i've been a long time player of Elite Dangerous... i can say that while it does carry the same aspects, it cranks up a notch on that one... like losing your shield unit... enemies breaking the canopy glass and sucking the oxygen out.. and you having to bolt from the fight to the nearest station within 5 to 20 mins... of emergency oxygen. Enemies disabling your guns and engine.. you just sit there and take bullets.. or worst of all... getting hit by an EMP with total shut down... Games like these really gives you the challenge and puts you in a tactical spot of deciding how to put on a good fight.
Oh Boy I really wonder which game could possibly be better. Oblivion repackage loading screen simulator which has been written by a nazi who hates creativity, or one of THE most notible rpgs since New Vegas which only crime was to have a rough release*caugh* Like every single Bethesda game, only difference is that CD Project went back and fixed it instead of trying to Gaslight their Players into thinking that actually they like the bugs*caugh caugh*
Post watching edit: holy s*it this whole video was just a bunch of staigth up lies, bad faith arguments, coping and making the exact same arguments they used to defend No Mans Skyrim to criticise Cyberpunk. A Gamejournalist could do a better job.
Wh... what... In actual youtuber, who said that you can enjoy multiple games like Starfield and cyberpunk, and Baldurs gate, this can be! There must only be one winner!
Sarah Morgan didn't like that.
I remember 3 years ago when people compared CP2077 to GTA SA. Now it’s certainly considered an amazing game
Asking the question is giving the answer.
"You cant give Credit for Update 2.0" 🤡
Starfield will be the same game in 3 years as it is now. Where as Cyberpunk will be even effin better in 3 years. Cyperpunk is more modder friendly than Snorefield. On launch I found CP2077(pc) a more exciting and enjoyable game than Sleepfield (pc) on launch, even with bugs.. Starfield looks dated, CP2077 looks cutting edge and its an older game eh?
I have to disagree with you on something. Cyberpunk main story is definitely better than Starfield. But Starfield side content is better than Cyberpunk. 1st off, Starfield's main story is a glorified fetch quest where the constellation group who are supposed to be out exploring the universe for decades have not explored a single planet. The entire question of the main quest is "are we alone in the universe" and "what is in the unknown". There seem pretty deep question in face value, but it's really not. These are question you ask a 5 year old to make them think you're smart. Then add to the fact that the answer of Starfield's main quest to these questions is... Yes and I don't know, respectively. Cyberpunk's main story on the other hand is simply about survival of one person. But throughout this journey of saving himself, he learned to save others and he learned his own worth. Basically a self discovery and character development that we as the player can learn from.
Frankly the problem of the story and side content in Starfield isn't that it has more, but the quality of the content, if you break down Starfield storytelling, it is basically power fantasy for kids, and the quality of this content is questionable at best.
Here is the deal, in Starfield you can be a pirate, you can be a ranger, you can be the galaxy hero, this stories, (side content) are simply not believeble at all, like how you can be so much things all at once? And this was worst in previous Bethesda games with the main protagonist usually becoming the head of whatever group or organization the protagonist came across.
While in Cyberpunk, V is ALWAYS a mercenary desperate to save his/her own skin, the: "you can be whatever you want" is basically limited by play style (builds) where you choose how you fight not exactly what you become, AND still you can have far more options than in Starfield, for example, you can skip the entire Aldecaldos questline if you just don't go meet with Panam (and see one of the most beautiful "backery" in the history of videogames up and close) thus cutting you out of an entire third act and ending
What i mean by that is that is that not only the side content in Cyberpunk has obviously a lot more quality, it also plays a huge role on the options you would have if you don't seek out the side content... you can pretty much ended up with the third act having only the Arasaka as an option... if you rush your playthrough.
Cyberpunk is way better not close
This is just, cyberpunk did enough and managed to redeem itself and starfield is better in most categories lol. I'm not blind lol there's no category were starfield is better, world design is an excellent exemple because to have a good world design you also need a good way of getting from point A to point B and that's definitely not going through 3 or 4 loading screens plus it's a empty universe full of empty meaningless boringa tasks lol, at least cyberpunk basic gigs are fun. I hope I don't need to talk about combat, story or progression. In regards to technical design, how are you going to review a games technical design but only look at it's problems and not what they did well too, starfield as, as many bugs as cyberpunk did at lunch plus basically every physics element wich belongs to the technical design is worse than cyberpunk, honestly you sound like you played cyberpunk at lunch a few hours and never got back in.
Poor cyberpunk being debased to a compare video with starfield.
Bethesda is complacent
Cyberpunk is far superior
Nice video! Do you plan on featuring other games on your channel?
What games would you like to see? There is a few others of these comparisons up on the channel already :)
Cyberpunk 2077. Duh.
If it's not fair to compare the games as they are now, why compare at all? :)
This comment section hates space😂
Well, for starters, Starfield is NOT an RPG. Hell, Madden and NBA2K are more "RPG" than Starfield. 🙄
Well thats an opinion.
Starfield is the GOAT! It surpasses CP2077 in every way!
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😜 jk
Honestly though, the base building in Starfield is WAY BETTER than Cyberpunk 2077. Just saying.
C77 doesn't have a base building 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
I love all the people drooling over cyberpunk. Yet, just a few years ago, it was the worst game to ever exist. Funny how gamers forget.
Because we don’t live in the past cyberpunk on release had perfect world design, story, mechanics etc but bugs ruined it. And now look they’ve fixed the bugs which made it phenomenal and on top of that they added a secret agent expansion featuring another famous actor good new characters storyline mapping endings etc Bethesda are still running the same engine as they did for fallout 😂 they couldn’t make a good game if they took a century to develop and perfect it
@coconuttwee7288 Sure buddy, sure.
You are the prime consumer for these corporations. Because you seem to be quite forgiving to a game that released in a broken, buggy, unpolished, unfinished, and in overpromised mess.
I guess as long as it takes them 3 years to fix it. All is forgiven!
At least Bethesda's launch for starfield was far smoother than cyberpunk. Bethesda did not receive a class action lawsuit and have their stocks plummeted by 70% after the release of their game. The same can't be said about cyberpunk.
@@Joseph-wh5of let’s not talk about the fact that cdpr got death threats to release the game and offered refunds when these very same people who threatened them didn’t like how unfinished it felt. Not to mention cyberpunk has been reborn Bethesda quite literally depend on modders to make their games look good their games are ran on the same century old engine that they refuse to upgrade and yet people like you are still bumming them for attention. Bethesda games are shit starfield is shit cyberpunk is not, end of story.
@coconuttwee7288 So you do endorse companies releasing unfinished products that they lie about? Good to know. Keep it up, little piggy, get your pre-order ready for Cyberpunk 2!
This is such a garbage comparison. Both aren't even in the same genre. It's like saying cod is better than pac-man
After 1.5 years only cyberpunk and after that 2.0 and dlc i went to starfield and have 55h in it after 9 days.
For me starfield. It runns perfect on my series x. Cyberpunk is more like cyberbug on my series x. Almost every mission in 2.0 and dlc had 1-2 bugs.
I love them both, can't really compare them.
There both so different rhen why even compare... for the views
Because every body hates to see bethesda scaming people again
Nice bait
Lol, all the butthurt comments. Objectively, this video is pretty accurate. Doesn't mean Cyberpunk isn't a better game for some people.
Starfield is 3 months old. Cyberpunk is 3 years old. In three years Starfield wil be a different game .
How ? Betsheda dont fix games moders do that for them... so vanilia Strafield will be the same bore empty loading screen simulator as is now.Tod say that when ppl start asking to optimisation because of low fps that our PC are bad and we need upgrade.... well Starfield has bad fps on newest graphical cards... but they to bad for "modern Besheda game".
🤣🤣🤣🤣
HOW?! What's wrong with Starfield cannot be fixed with DLC'S or mods.
Cause CK comes out next year.
No amount of patches will remove all those loading screens. Cyberpunk never had alot of madatory loading screens. In fact I don't think outside of loading a save there are no mandatory loading screens. You will only see loading screens if you use the fast travel system. But most people don't use that system because driving around the world just feels good and the radio music slaps.
@Slomoshun09 Special needs edition! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
A fair comparison would be cyberpunk at launch vs. Starfield at launch. Or give Starfield a couple years and compare it where Cyberpunk is now.
absolutely, I tried to cover that during the video and point out parts elements from CP at launch vs Starfield.
In couple of years? You mean Starfield Anniversary Special Legendary Deluxe VR Edition - Remastered?
He means with mods.
@@fatallyfatcat5274 not even mods can save Starfield... they can't change make the loading screens go away.
No lmao, a 2020 game vs a 2023 game.
Cyberpunk 2077 is the winner, hands down, and got bored of Starfield. The planets were boring very repetitive .
You pre-ordered the Starfield Collector's edition, didn't you? That sunk-cost is the only possible reason I can think for anyone saying anything positive about that absolute trash fire. Are you the AI that was writing all those review responses? You sound like it.
Nah honestly though how could he give anything to starfield especially world building😭 where almost every single planet from Bethesda is pointless and has 0 content whereas the entire cyberpunk map has tons of gigs side missions main quests spanning from different locations shops sights feel etc all better than starfield. Its like saying starfield has better map and world building than gta or rdr2
How can you even compare these two games? One of the is super old, boring with ugly everything and one of them is superior in every aspect of it... guess which :)